Summary:
Taking the perspective of an e-poetry and an advocate, Strickland makes the case for a distinctive art form called "e-poetry" and outlines 11 characteristics of e-poetry that she considers distinguish e-poetry from traditional print poetry. The essay takes the premise that e-poetry is a new, transformative kind of literature for which computation, networks, and new kinds of reading are essential. For Strickland, e-poetry exemplifies a kind of creative building that has some parallels in the inventive technologies of the past (Greek oral epic, etc.) but is uniquely responsive to the prevalent technologies of today and contemporary social conditions. For Strickland, the network, code and artificial intelligence are not the enemies of literary culture but new materials or, perhaps, a new environment for the making of art which also invite new kinds of enjoyment for the reader.
Commentary:
Strickland's essay provides a brief tour of the kinds of e-literature being created today and attempts to generate excitement about the creative potential. She does not address complications (such as the corporatization of the digital networks, or the problematic economy of free downloads. There are some puzzling shifts between claims about poetry specifically and literature in general. One can also imagine readers from outside a middle-class American context questioning some of her assumptions about the online condition. Overall, it helps to address the frequent misconceptions that digital literature = the Kindle, or that E-lit is a shallow, representation of traditional literary works in a pretty, electronic package.
Question:
To what extent is Strickland's sense of the value, promise and excitement of e-poetry informed by or tied to a modernist value of "making it new"? Does it depend on an a certain worldview or commitment to literature as responding to changed contemporary conditions (as opposed to a view of literature as embodying classic, enduring values that may counter the ephemeral or daily)?
Poetry Foundation
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/features/articles/detail/69224//
Summary:
Taking the perspective of an e-poetry and an advocate, Strickland makes the case for a distinctive art form called "e-poetry" and outlines 11 characteristics of e-poetry that she considers distinguish e-poetry from traditional print poetry. The essay takes the premise that e-poetry is a new, transformative kind of literature for which computation, networks, and new kinds of reading are essential. For Strickland, e-poetry exemplifies a kind of creative building that has some parallels in the inventive technologies of the past (Greek oral epic, etc.) but is uniquely responsive to the prevalent technologies of today and contemporary social conditions. For Strickland, the network, code and artificial intelligence are not the enemies of literary culture but new materials or, perhaps, a new environment for the making of art which also invite new kinds of enjoyment for the reader.
Commentary:
Strickland's essay provides a brief tour of the kinds of e-literature being created today and attempts to generate excitement about the creative potential. She does not address complications (such as the corporatization of the digital networks, or the problematic economy of free downloads. There are some puzzling shifts between claims about poetry specifically and literature in general. One can also imagine readers from outside a middle-class American context questioning some of her assumptions about the online condition. Overall, it helps to address the frequent misconceptions that digital literature = the Kindle, or that E-lit is a shallow, representation of traditional literary works in a pretty, electronic package.
Question:
To what extent is Strickland's sense of the value, promise and excitement of e-poetry informed by or tied to a modernist value of "making it new"? Does it depend on an a certain worldview or commitment to literature as responding to changed contemporary conditions (as opposed to a view of literature as embodying classic, enduring values that may counter the ephemeral or daily)?